Reflected Ceiling Plan Work Flow

[line-weight]

@Matt Panzer getting this to work has reminded me of another issue related to section viewports.

 

Grid line objects get drawn as a solid line "in elevation" (as well as existing in the annotations space) if they are seen by the "below cut plane" extents of the section.

 

I think I've noticed this previously in HSVPs and for that reason place my grid line objects at an elevation well above the model. That means that normal downwards-looking HSVPs don't see them and the issue doesn't arise. However... in these reversed ones, they *are* now seen, and unless I exclude them by setting the "below cut plane" extents to a suitable limit, they get drawn as solid lines in the viewport (superimposed on the dashed lines they are intended to display with, in annotations space. Not sure if this is a bug, or me doing something wrong.

[Matt Panzer]

49 minutes ago, line-weight said:

 

Yup sure, got that - it's just that that particular number no longer refers to an absolute-value elevation, as it does normally.

 

Right.  That's why we need to create a proper UI for RCPs so those field names and numbers are presented to the user that makes sense.

[Matt Panzer]

On 2/29/2024 at 10:17 AM, line-weight said:

@Matt Panzer getting this to work has reminded me of another issue related to section viewports.

 

Grid line objects get drawn as a solid line "in elevation" (as well as existing in the annotations space) if they are seen by the "below cut plane" extents of the section.

 

I think I've noticed this previously in HSVPs and for that reason place my grid line objects at an elevation well above the model. That means that normal downwards-looking HSVPs don't see them and the issue doesn't arise. However... in these reversed ones, they *are* now seen, and unless I exclude them by setting the "below cut plane" extents to a suitable limit, they get drawn as solid lines in the viewport (superimposed on the dashed lines they are intended to display with, in annotations space. Not sure if this is a bug, or me doing something wrong.

 

@line-weight, I found an outstanding bug (VB-174392) related to this issue.  The thing I found (back when it was reported) that fixed the problem was to turn off both  "Display extents before cut plane" and "Display extents beyond cut plane", update the viewport, then turn on the extents as needed.  Maybe give that a shot?

[Matt Panzer]

15 minutes ago, Matt Panzer said:

2 hours ago, line-weight said:

@Matt Panzer getting this to work has reminded me of another issue related to section viewports.

 

Grid line objects get drawn as a solid line "in elevation" (as well as existing in the annotations space) if they are seen by the "below cut plane" extents of the section.

 

I think I've noticed this previously in HSVPs and for that reason place my grid line objects at an elevation well above the model. That means that normal downwards-looking HSVPs don't see them and the issue doesn't arise. However... in these reversed ones, they *are* now seen, and unless I exclude them by setting the "below cut plane" extents to a suitable limit, they get drawn as solid lines in the viewport (superimposed on the dashed lines they are intended to display with, in annotations space. Not sure if this is a bug, or me doing something wrong.

Expand  

 

@line-weight, I found an outstanding bug (VB-174392) related to this issue.  The now thing I found (back when it was reported) that fixed the problem was to turn off both  "Display extents before cut plane" and "Display extents beyond cut plane", update the viewport, then turn on the extents as needed.  Maybe give that a shot?

 

Have you tried that file in VW 2024?  From what I see, the issue has been fixed.

[line-weight]

On 2/29/2024 at 6:17 PM, Matt Panzer said:

 

Have you tried that file in VW 2024?  From what I see, the issue has been fixed.

 

I haven't tried it in VW2024 yet - but good news if it's fixed.

[line-weight]

@Matt Panzer I think I've found a minor bug, using the unofficial reversed horizontal section RCP approach.

 

A line was showing on a slab object that shouldn't have been there. The slab had its uppermost components offset at the edge, but not the lowermost component (which formed the ceiling to the space). So, viewed from below, none of those offsets should have been visible but it was drawing a line for the edge of the offset components.

 

I turned off "display 2D components" and the line went away. That solves it for now but would be a problem for anyone wanting to use 2D components elsewhere in the viewport.

[Matt Panzer]

24 minutes ago, line-weight said:

@Matt Panzer I think I've found a minor bug, using the unofficial reversed horizontal section RCP approach.

 

A line was showing on a slab object that shouldn't have been there. The slab had its uppermost components offset at the edge, but not the lowermost component (which formed the ceiling to the space). So, viewed from below, none of those offsets should have been visible but it was drawing a line for the edge of the offset components.

 

I turned off "display 2D components" and the line went away. That solves it for now but would be a problem for anyone wanting to use 2D components elsewhere in the viewport.

 

Ah, right.  Thank you for bringing this up!  I agree that this is a bug and submitted one (VB-202822).

[Michael Siggers]

On 8/17/2023 at 1:50 PM, line-weight said:

 

I am experimenting with this - I am a top-plan refusenik and instead use horizontal sections for my floorplans.

 

Therefore, making a reflected ceiling plan in theory is as simple as changing the settings on a floorplan to view things above the cut plane.

 

What's a little annoying is that doing this does not parallel how you set up a regular floorplan in a horizontal section.

 

When you set up a horizontal section floorplan, you tick "display extents above cut plane", and then you go to the advanced properties button, and in my case I specify that everything is going to be drawn in my default elevational linework class:

 

 

But the same process for a RCP is a bit different. You tick "display extents above cut plane" but then, in order to set what this is going to look like, you don't go to the advanced properties button; instead you have to use the "object display" button in the "extents above cut plane" section.

 

What this does not then give you is a "use class" option. You are given a list of all your classes, and you have to choose how objects in each class are to be drawn in elevation in your RCP:

 

 

I usually have a very large number of classes. I basically have to select all of these classes, and then specify that they all use a particular pen type, colour, etc:

 

 

And tell it to use a pen type that matches my elevational linework class.

 

This, basically, works, but seems inconsistent and I think it should be possible to set up in exactly the same way as a "normal" horizontal section, that is specify that none of it is drawn by object but all of it is drawn in linework using a chosen class.

 

Then, if I make an adjustment to my elevational linework class, it'll update in RCPs as well as all my floorplans, elevations etc.

 

Also, I'm yet to see what happens when I make a new class - will I have to go and manually adjust that specific class to be drawn with the right pen in each of my RCPs?

Hi

 

Hoping you can help.

 

The above has all worked ok for me, but the stumbling block comes when I try to dimension the Ceiling Plan. Vectorworks will not snap to the objects shown. Extract image attached. It will not snap to the item circled in red, but ok with the sectional item circled in green.

 

Have you experienced this?

 

Kind regards

 

Mke

[line-weight]

42 minutes ago, Michael Siggers said:

Hi

 

Hoping you can help.

 

The above has all worked ok for me, but the stumbling block comes when I try to dimension the Ceiling Plan. Vectorworks will not snap to the objects shown. Extract image attached. It will not snap to the item circled in red, but ok with the sectional item circled in green.

 

Have you experienced this?

 

Kind regards

 

Mke

 

I haven't noticed that particular issue - however, to make my RCPs I haven't been using the method described in the post that you quote (because it's too much fuss having to set all the classes individually). Instead I have been using the slightly unofficial method suggested by @Matt Panzer in this post.

 

For what it's worth, that method seems to have worked ok. So far I have successfully used it in working drawings for one project in VW2023. I've just started migrating to VW2025 and haven't really tested in that version yet.

[Michael Siggers]

Thank you @line-weight

 

That seemed to have worked quite well.

 

One final question, what is the best way to flip the viewport and keep the Drawing Label the same?

 

Kind regards

 

Mike

[Michael Siggers]

Apologies @line-weight

 

Flipped it ok.

 

Thank you for your help.

 

Would be interested in hearing how you get on with the other method in VW2025. I found it ok, all apart from the dimensioning problem.

 

Mike

[line-weight]

13 minutes ago, Michael Siggers said:

Apologies @line-weight

 

Flipped it ok.

 

Thank you for your help.

 

Would be interested in hearing how you get on with the other method in VW2025. I found it ok, all apart from the dimensioning problem.

 

Mike

 

By the "other method" do you mean the one where you flip a HSVP?

[Michael Siggers]

4 minutes ago, line-weight said:

 

By the "other method" do you mean the one where you flip a HSVP?

Ah, I meant the method I was trying before your suggestion. The Clip Cube method has worked well.

 

Mike

[line-weight]

24 minutes ago, Michael Siggers said:

Ah, I meant the method I was trying before your suggestion. The Clip Cube method has worked well.

 

Mike

 

I don't plan to try that other method in VW2025 - but I hope to continue using the one using the clip cube & flipped viewport, because it worked fairly well in VW2023.

[Michael Siggers]

1 minute ago, line-weight said:

 

I don't plan to try that other method in VW2025 - but I hope to continue using the one using the clip cube & flipped viewport, because it worked fairly well in VW2023.

[Michael Siggers]

1 minute ago, line-weight said:

 

I don't plan to try that other method in VW2025 - but I hope to continue using the one using the clip cube & flipped viewport, because it worked fairly well in VW2023.

You certainly saved my bacon today. Thank you.

[Matt Panzer]

@Michael Siggers, As @line-weight points out, I believe a horizontal section created from the bottom of a clip cube (and flipped) is the best way to derive an RCP from the model.  As we move forward to improve horizontal sections, we do want to add a proper RCP horizontal section that will essentially give you the same behavior you're getting now but without having to flip them and deal with the "above" and "below" cut plane settings being reversed.

 

In any case, I'm glad you're able to get what you need with @line-weight's help!

[Michael Siggers]

Hi @line-weight

 

One final question.

 

Just noticed that by flipping the viewport, the Viewport Title has flipped to the wrong way round. Attached is a screenshot to show what it should look like, circled in green.

 

Would you happen to know how I correct this?

 

Kind regards

 

Mike

[Michael Siggers]

Oooooo, found the solution.......

 

Edit the Annotations and Flip the Drawing Title.

 

It's getting late 🙂

 

Mike